Search for: "United States v. California"
Results 3981 - 4000
of 13,833
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Mar 2009, 3:45 am
The search at issue was performed by state agents, and thus the restrictions of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution applied. [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 8:21 am
Idaho State University et al – United States District Court – Idaho District Court – February 15th, 2019) involves a discrimination claim. [read post]
9 Jan 2007, 9:57 am
In Treiber & Straub v. [read post]
5 Aug 2014, 6:57 pm
In U.S. v. [read post]
4 May 2012, 2:00 am
After the United States emerged from the Second World War, Congress began to focus on the organization of the executive branch. [read post]
30 Apr 2013, 9:22 am
One might joke that Monday’s order in Boyer v. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 12:04 pm
California Chamber of Commerce v. [read post]
20 Dec 2016, 9:47 pm
Ophca LLC v. [read post]
22 Mar 2012, 3:48 pm
In that section, Congress stated unequivocally that “the United States government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the United States,” § 40103(a)(1). [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 7:47 am
Leavitt (543US631) — First win in the ISDEAA contract support costs war Take Our Poll Match-up No. 14 (15) United States v. [read post]
6 Feb 2018, 11:21 am
In United States v. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 3:00 am
Sanchez v. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 12:32 pm
Two weeks after the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its opinion in Alice v. [read post]
24 May 2021, 4:21 pm
The case, United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2010, 11:39 am
In Lunbery v. [read post]
9 Jul 2019, 7:07 am
REGENT INSURANCE COMPANY – United States District Court – District of Kansas – July 9th, 2019) involves a personal injury claim. [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 4:35 pm
We touched on it a bit yesterday, but today's roundup is quite heavy on United States v. [read post]
9 Jul 2010, 9:10 am
United States v. [read post]
16 Feb 2018, 2:30 am
United States, in which the petitioner argues that under the Fourth Amendment, “[h]is general acquiescence to a search of his bag … did not extend to the destruction of his personal property,” the court could “bring greater clarity to one’s constitutional rights during a consensual search. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 7:18 pm
The majority relies heavily on United States v. [read post]
